Alan Pardew

[Mick]

 

With what???  There was nothing in the squad available to do anything more than what we could have done today.  We went to restrict spurs which we did if Taylor and Perch would decide to tackle any players we would of stopped them scoring.

 

We could have put 2 up front and gave them something to worry about.  We could have protected our goal better by bringing Williamson back into the starting 11.

[Darth Crooks]

I think anybody expecting a newly promoted team to win at WHL is demanding instant success

 

Don't be daft, we've set out a negative team against a Spurs team who before today had only managed to stop the opposition scoring once.

 

They rip teams apart on the counter, and supposedly teams have achieved more success by sitting back at WHL. If we'd had a go and lost 4-0 people would be even less happy.

 

Exactly, thats why we still need to leave Tiote and Smith on because we were always vulnerable on the counter attack.

 

So the game plan was to try and hold on to the 1-0?

 

Anycase if you watched the game, Smith and Tiote played much further forward anycase, so it wasn't even like we played 2 DM's all game.  Also   Barton & Routledge were playing much further forward than the other 2 midfielders/

 

So Smith and Tiote were on as DM's but they didnt? And Barton and Routledge were doing what they should be doing anyway? I'm sorry but Smith should have come off for Ranger. might as well lose 3-0 if we're chasing a 2-0 lead

[Ashley17]

I think anybody expecting a newly promoted team to win at WHL is demanding instant success

 

Don't be daft, we've set out a negative team against a Spurs team who before today had only managed to stop the opposition scoring once.

 

They rip teams apart on the counter, and supposedly teams have achieved more success by sitting back at WHL. If we'd had a go and lost 4-0 people would be even less happy.

 

Exactly, thats why we still need to leave Tiote and Smith on because we were always vulnerable on the counter attack.

 

So the game plan was to try and hold on to the 1-0?

 

Anycase if you watched the game, Smith and Tiote played much further forward anycase, so it wasn't even like we played 2 DM's all game.  Also   Barton & Routledge were playing much further forward than the other 2 midfielders/

 

So Smith and Tiote were on as DM's but they didnt? And Barton and Routledge were doing what they should be doing anyway? I'm sorry but Smith should have come off for Ranger. might as well lose 3-0 if we're chasing a 2-0 lead

 

Tiote was on the verge of a red, so I think he had to be subbed for the sake of us keeping 11 players on.

[Mick]

Bolton hadn't beaten anybody 5-1 until we rocked up. But it hadn't happened before so there's no way it should have happened that day. Right?

 

So because we let in 5 against Bolton we would have let 5 in against Spurs?  It doesn't work that way, you mentioned 4-0 and have proven that it's irrelevant.

[Guest neesy111]

I think anybody expecting a newly promoted team to win at WHL is demanding instant success

 

Don't be daft, we've set out a negative team against a Spurs team who before today had only managed to stop the opposition scoring once.

 

They rip teams apart on the counter, and supposedly teams have achieved more success by sitting back at WHL. If we'd had a go and lost 4-0 people would be even less happy.

 

Exactly, thats why we still need to leave Tiote and Smith on because we were always vulnerable on the counter attack.

 

So the game plan was to try and hold on to the 1-0?

 

Anycase if you watched the game, Smith and Tiote played much further forward anycase, so it wasn't even like we played 2 DM's all game.  Also   Barton & Routledge were playing much further forward than the other 2 midfielders/

 

So Smith and Tiote were on as DM's but they didnt? And Barton and Routledge were doing what they should be doing anyway? I'm sorry but Smith should have come off for Ranger. might as well lose 3-0 if we're chasing a 2-0 lead

 

Smith and Tiote did more going forward than Jonas anycase.

[Darth Crooks]

We get it mate. jonas is shit. change the record

[Frazzle]

Bolton hadn't beaten anybody 5-1 until we rocked up. But it hadn't happened before so there's no way it should have happened that day. Right?

 

So because we let in 5 against Bolton we would have let 5 in against Spurs?  It doesn't work that way, you mentioned 4-0 and have proven that it's irrelevant.

 

Neither does it work the way you said.  We won't get beaten 4-0 because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals?

 

Ashley isn't saying we would've gotten beat 5-1, just that you can't rule it out.  You seem to think because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals it wouldn't happen to us.  Exactly the same point you're arguing against.

[Ashley17]

Bolton hadn't beaten anybody 5-1 until we rocked up. But it hadn't happened before so there's no way it should have happened that day. Right?

 

So because we let in 5 against Bolton we would have let 5 in against Spurs?  It doesn't work that way, you mentioned 4-0 and have proven that it's irrelevant.

 

I think we're losing sight of the point here (and yes that is largely my fault). Teams have achieved success at WHL by playing cautiously. Had we played 4-4-2, we'd be very open, we'd have Carroll and either somebody shite or a relative rookie up front - who has never started a Premiership game. Yes Spurs have never steamrollered anybody but how many have gone out and attacked them? Presumably not that many, KD or any of the Spurs fans will be able to shed more light on that I imagine. Playing an extra defensive midfielder was probably meant to nullify VDV, who was quite quiet. Unfortunately, they have quality all over the pitch, whereas we don't. Williamson could have played, sure. Would it have made a difference? Probably not. Likewise Kadar, who is good physically but lacks pace, would probably not have done any better against Lennon than Perch.

[Guest BooBoo]

Would folk have been happier or more annoyed if we'd played 4-4-2 and been beaten 0-3?

[Ashley17]

Would folk have been happier or more annoyed if we'd played 4-4-2 and been beaten 0-3?

 

You can't say that, Spurs haven't ever won 3-0!!

[Dave]

Would folk have been happier or more annoyed if we'd played 4-4-2 and been beaten 0-3?

 

Depends how the game went, obviously.

[Guest neesy111]

King Dawson said the teams that have done well at WHL are the 1's that have sat back, and got spurs on the counter.

[Nobody]

Does anyone have any confident that Smith will ever do anything useful with the ball?

Your answer should be no, and therefore he should have been the one to leave the pitch when we are chasing the game with one man more on the pitch. And I say this as someone who reckons Jonas is fucking shite.

[Ashley17]

Does anyone have any confident that Smith will ever do anything useful with the ball?

Your answer should be no, and therefore he should have been the one to leave the pitch when we are chasing the game with one man more on the pitch. And I say this as someone who reckons Jonas is fucking shite.

 

So Smith goes off and then Tiote gets sent off. Then what?

[Nobody]

Does anyone have any confident that Smith will ever do anything useful with the ball?

Your answer should be no, and therefore he should have been the one to leave the pitch when we are chasing the game with one man more on the pitch. And I say this as someone who reckons Jonas is fucking shite.

 

So Smith goes off and then Tiote gets sent off. Then what?

Then we'd have tried and failed, and we'd still be 10v10 and still a chance to get something from it. Now we didn't even try and failed.

Tiote didn't get sent off anyway, so I don't really see your argument.

[Ashley17]

Does anyone have any confident that Smith will ever do anything useful with the ball?

Your answer should be no, and therefore he should have been the one to leave the pitch when we are chasing the game with one man more on the pitch. And I say this as someone who reckons Jonas is fucking shite.

 

So Smith goes off and then Tiote gets sent off. Then what?

Then we'd have tried and failed, and we'd still be 10v10 and still a chance to get something from it. Now we didn't even try and failed.

Tiote didn't get sent off anyway, so I don't really see your argument.

 

He got subbed before he could get sent off. To say he was walking a tightrope is an understatement.

[Guest Stephen927]

We also can't afford to have Tiote missing out the Wigan game due to suspension.

[Guest]

There wasn't a cat in hell's chance of Tiote lasting the 90 minutes today the way the game was going.

[Guest BooBoo]

Tiote's collection of yellow cards is getting out of hand. I wouldnt be surpirsed if he picks up three bans this season.

 

In fact discipline as a whole this season has been poor and its costing us regularly.

[Frazzle]

If you're going to have a 'destroyer' in midfield yellow cards are the price you pay.  I bet the likes of de Jong and others get a similar amount of bans.  Not to mention Cattermole at the far end of the spectrum.

[Mick]

Neither does it work the way you said.  We won't get beaten 4-0 because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals?

Ashley isn't saying we would've gotten beat 5-1, just that you can't rule it out.  You seem to think because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals it wouldn't happen to us.   Exactly the same point you're arguing against.

 

I countered what he said with something to make a point, maybe you should look to see what was said and when.  I didn’t say “We won't get beaten 4-0 because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals.”  I asked why a 4-0 scoreline should be considered, it was just a random number plucked out of fresh air.

[Frazzle]

Neither does it work the way you said.  We won't get beaten 4-0 because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals?

Ashley isn't saying we would've gotten beat 5-1, just that you can't rule it out.  You seem to think because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals it wouldn't happen to us.   Exactly the same point you're arguing against.

 

I countered what he said with something to make a point, maybe you should look to see what was said and when.  I didn’t say “We won't get beaten 4-0 because Spurs haven't beaten anyone by two goals.”  I asked why a 4-0 scoreline should be considered, it was just a random number plucked out of fresh air.

 

A random number which you dismissed down to Spurs' previous form.

[Mick]

I think we're losing sight of the point here (and yes that is largely my fault). Teams have achieved success at WHL by playing cautiously. Had we played 4-4-2, we'd be very open, we'd have Carroll and either somebody s**** or a relative rookie up front - who has never started a Premiership game. Yes Spurs have never steamrollered anybody but how many have gone out and attacked them? Presumably not that many, KD or any of the Spurs fans will be able to shed more light on that I imagine. Playing an extra defensive midfielder was probably meant to nullify VDV, who was quite quiet. Unfortunately, they have quality all over the pitch, whereas we don't. Williamson could have played, sure. Would it have made a difference? Probably not. Likewise Kadar, who is good physically but lacks pace, would probably not have done any better against Lennon than Perch.

 

We'll never know what might have happened if we had done things differently, personally I think we would have had a better chance with a different line-up to the one we played.  Obviously we might have scored and just got them to come at us more, we'll never know now.

[Mick]

A random number which you dismissed down to Spurs' previous form.

 

Do you never look at form and come to an opinion or do you look at everything as a 1 off?

[Guest]

A random number which you dismissed down to Spurs' previous form.

 

Do you never look at form and come to an opinion or do you look at everything as a 1 off?

 

When you're a lower mid-table side you're going to lose as many/more than you win so you have to take every game as a one-off. We're not good enough to say, "We should definitely get 4 points from West Ham & Wigan" in the same way we're not going to get beat off all the better sides.